CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Davlyn House
Rated Outstanding: inspectors found the home performing exceptionally well.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing infection, using PPE safely, supporting testing and managing outbreaks. They also found the infection prevention and control policy was up to date.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- This question was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Outstanding
- This question was not rated in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, December 2020
Davlyn House was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control measures were safe.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 4 December 2020. It was carried out because of coronavirus outbreaks and looked at infection prevention and control.
Inspectors were assured that the home used personal protective equipment safely, supported testing, followed shielding and distancing rules, and had an up-to-date infection control policy.
The home had shared visiting arrangements with relatives. It also used video calls, telephone calls and a private social media account to help people stay in touch when visits were restricted.
The inspection did not give an overall quality rating. The safe question was recorded as inspected but not rated.
Clear visiting arrangements
The home had shared its visiting procedure with relatives. This included booking, health screening and PPE requirements.
“The visiting procedure in place had been shared with relatives.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the environment well maintained and clean. Extra cleaning had been introduced to reduce the risk of infection spreading.
“Additional cleaning had been implemented to lower the risk of cross transmission.” from the report
Separated work areas
The home used zones and assigned staff to particular areas to reduce the risk of cross infection.
“Zoning of areas within the home had been implemented and staff were assigned to work in specific areas to reduce the risk of cross infection.” from the report
Support for staff
Staff received support during periods of anxiety and were directed to wellbeing services.
“Staff were supported by the registered manager during periods of anxiety and staff had been signposted to wellbeing services.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How does the current visiting procedure work, including booking, health screening and PPE?
- 02How are people and staff tested for infections now?
- 03How are different areas of the home and staff teams organised to reduce cross infection?
- 04How does the home manage an infection outbreak?
- 05How can relatives stay in contact if visits are restricted?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices during the coronavirus response; it did not rate the home's overall quality or the other four questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 December 2020 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, November 2018
Rated Outstanding overall; inspectors found exceptionally kind, personalised care and strong leadership, with safe, effective and responsive care rated Good.
Inspectors visited on 26 and 28 September 2018 without announcing the visits. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals. They observed care, reviewed care records, staff files, medicine records, complaints and quality checks.
The home was rated Outstanding overall. Caring and well-led were Outstanding. Safe, effective and responsive were Good. Inspectors found no serious risks or concerns during this inspection or through their ongoing monitoring.
People were supported by staff who knew them well and treated them with kindness and respect. Care was personalised, people were encouraged to stay independent and take part in activities, and medicines, staffing, food and healthcare were managed safely.
The previous inspection in February 2016 rated the service Good. At this inspection, the home had maintained its outstanding care and had improved its leadership and quality monitoring enough to receive an Outstanding rating overall.
Kind and compassionate care
Staff supported people as individuals and provided emotional reassurance when they were distressed. Inspectors saw staff protecting people's privacy and dignity.
“Staff were kind and compassionate and people who used the service felt valued.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's abilities, preferences and changing needs. Staff encouraged independence and adapted support to help people achieve things that mattered to them.
“People's support plans detailed what each person could do for themselves and how staff should provide support.” from the report
Strong leadership
The manager was visible and approachable, and staff understood the home's person-centred values. Quality checks and action plans were used to identify and address shortfalls.
“There was a culture of continuous learning and improvement underpinned by formal governance and quality assurance systems.” from the report
Safe medicines and staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs, robust recruitment arrangements and medicines stored and administered safely.
“People continued to receive their medicines safely. The service had systems in place to audit medication practices and records were kept showing when medication had been administered.” from the report
Activities and community links
Activities were varied and tailored to people's interests. People were supported to attend community events, maintain relationships and take part in meaningful activities.
“People and their relatives told us that there was a wide range of fulfilling activities available and these were tailored to individual needs and preferences.” from the report
End-of-life care was not tested
minorNo one was receiving end-of-life care during the inspection, so inspectors did not see end-of-life care plans in practice. Families should ask how their relative's wishes would be recorded and followed.
“There was no one receiving end of life care at the time of our inspection and we did not see any end of life care plans in place.” from the report
- 01How would you record and support my relative's end-of-life wishes if their needs changed?
- 02How will you make sure my relative's care plan is updated when their health, mobility or preferences change?
- 03How do you decide whether there are enough staff for the people living here?
- 04What activities and community opportunities would be available for my relative's particular interests and communication needs?
- 05How can my relative or our family raise a concern, and how would we be kept informed about the response?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions; no one was receiving end-of-life care, so that aspect was not observed in practice. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 November 2018 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Davlyn House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Good to Outstanding.
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2018Outstandingup from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Outstanding
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 2 May 2014.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Stoke-on-Trent
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,190 a week. 93 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“She's shown compassion, patience and a level of understanding that no other carer has given.”
“She maintained a great environment for mum both with the tidiness and cleanliness of the house and Mum and with her caring and understanding attitude.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.